📝Page 141

Thinking about the Poem

Q1. What does the young man mean by “great honey-coloured /Ramparts at your ear?” Why does he say that young men are “thrown into despair” by them?
Answer: By “great honey-coloured /Ramparts at your ear,” the young man means Anne’s beautiful, honey-coloured hair that falls around her ears. He says that young men are “thrown into despair” by them because her hair is so lovely that they only notice and are attracted to her physical beauty, and they cannot look past it to see her inner self.

Q2. What colour is the young woman’s hair? What does she say she can change it to? Why would she want to do so?
Answer: The young woman’s hair is “great honey-coloured” or “yellow.” She says she can change it to brown, or black, or carrot (orange). She would want to do so to prove that she is not loved for her hair, but for herself alone. She wants to show that true love should not be based on physical appearance.

Q3. Objects have qualities which make them desirable to others. Can you think of some objects (a car, a phone, a dress…) and say what qualities make one object more desirable than another? Imagine you were trying to sell an object: what qualities would you emphasise?
Answer: A discussion-based question.

• A car: Speed, fuel efficiency, safety features, brand name, luxury, design, and interior comfort.
• A phone: Processor speed, camera quality, screen resolution, battery life, memory, and design.
• A dress: Material, comfort, color, design, and brand.

When selling, you would emphasise the qualities that the potential buyer values most, like “This car has incredible fuel efficiency,” or “This phone’s camera takes professional-quality photos.”

Q4. What about people? Do we love others because we like their qualities, whether physical or mental? Or is it possible to love someone “for themselves alone”? Are some people ‘more lovable’ than others? Discuss this question in pairs or in groups, considering points like the following.
Answer: This is a discussion-based question. It’s about exploring the difference between loving someone for their qualities versus loving them for who they are. The poem suggests that true love should be for the person alone, not their external qualities. However, the old religious man in the poem says that only God can do this perfectly.

i) a parent or caregiver’s love… A parent’s love for a child is often cited as an example of unconditional love, where the love is not based on the child’s qualities (like being clever or physically perfect).

ii) the public’s love for a film star… The public’s love for a celebrity is often based on their qualities, such as talent, beauty, or charisma. This love can be temporary if the qualities change or fade.

iii) your love for a friend… Love for a friend is usually based on a combination of qualities like loyalty, kindness, shared interests, and humor.

iv) your love for a pet… Love for a pet is often unconditional, based on the bond you share rather than their specific qualities.

Q5. You have perhaps concluded that people are not objects to be valued for their qualities or riches rather than for themselves. But elsewhere Yeats asks the question: How can we separate the dancer from the dance? Is it possible to separate ‘the person himself or herself from how the person looks, sounds, walks, and so on? Think of how you or a friend or member of your family has changed over the years. Has your relationship also changed? In what way?
Answer: This is a discussion-based question. The question from Yeats, “How can we separate the dancer from the dance?” means that a person’s actions, appearance, and qualities are a part of who they are. It is difficult to completely separate someone’s inner self from their outer self. For example, if a friend becomes very negative and unkind, it’s hard to love them “for themselves alone” because their negative qualities are part of who they have become. Our relationships often change as people change. This is a complex idea to discuss, and there is no single right answer.